Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : MSFT Internet Explorer vs. NSCP Navigator -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: damniseedemons who wrote (15405)	12/23/1997 8:00:00 AM
From: Daniel Schuh	Respond to of 24154

Sal, of course I beat you to the story from The Economist, Bill's favorite magazine and the source of my little prayer. I think my excerp, which you can see in 15395 here. (https://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=3026802) is a little more true to the story. The story is pretty much in line with what seems to be the consensus in the press about Microsoft's legal strategy. Also, to repeat as usual, Yet, from an antitrust perspective, paranoia is looking increasingly perilous. A paranoid firm is more likely to violate antitrust law, which says plainly that dominant companies have to follow stricter standards than do small companies. "It's funny to talk about killing your competitors when you have only 5% of your market," Thomas Kerr, an antitrust professor at Carnegie Mellon University, points out. "When you have 80%, you are asking for trouble." As I've said numerous times here, antitrust law applies only to monopolists, unfair though that may seem to the noble Bill and co. Seems that a lot of people here are never going to accept that, but that's the law. There are established channels for working to change the law, but nobody seems much interested in that either. Maybe you guys just need to find a new Reagan to run for President, put Charles "Rick" Rule back in his proper position. Then again, a de facto moratorium on enforcement isn't quite as good as statutory imunity ala MLB, or outright repeal. Oh, and the Pack is looking plenty hungry right now, after that embarassment against the Colts they've done just fine. Especially the game after, but we know that was all due to playing dirty and bad refs, url with quotes from dem 'boys available on request. Colts ain't that bad, either, ask Jimmy Johnson, they embarassed him a little worse. The Pack didn't quite get home field against SF, talk about wimp schedules, but playing there isn't quite like playing in Dallas, no turf you know. But, I make no predictions there either. Cheers, Dan.